Train Services: Extreme Weather

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd November 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon]

I thank my hon. Friend for those wise words. He underlines the very issue. When extreme weather hits Northern Ireland, as we have seen with increasingly violent storms and localised flooding, our transport network instantly buckles.

For a student heading from our area to the Magee campus in Coleraine or Londonderry, a single weather-related rail restriction, a flooded track or a missed connection means missing vital lectures, labs and exams. They are fighting against a system where a simple weather warning can completely derail their academic work. We cannot expect our young people to fulfil their educational potential when the physical infrastructure to get them to the lecture hall is entirely unreliable or continually breaks down.

The situation is even more acute for further education college students in my constituency who are travelling south to campuses in Downpatrick. Many of these young people depend entirely on the Strangford lough ferry service to bridge the gap between Portaferry and Strangford village. That ferry is supposed to be a lifeline—a one-mile crossing that replaces what would otherwise be a gruelling 46-mile journey by road. Yet we have repeatedly seen sudden suspensions of the ferry service due to severe storm conditions, high tides and subsequent mechanical strains caused by vessels operating in extreme weather. When the ferry stops, the education of these teenagers stops. Bus substitutions are hastily put in place, but they cannot make up for the hours that are lost. These students arrive at college exhausted and late, or—even worse—they are unable to get there at all. They face attendance penalties through absolutely no fault of their own.

The Minister will probably look at a map and say to me, “Well, Strangford does not have a railway line.” No, it does not, but our workers and our commuters are resourceful. Thousands of my constituents utilise the Belfast to Bangor rail line, which the hon. Member for North Down (Alex Easton) referred to. It is located just 10 minutes away from the edge of my constituency, so it is a good way to get a mainline train into Belfast; it is not too far away and its location means that people do not have to park their car in Belfast. Our workers, jobseekers and commuters drive, get lifts or catch connecting buses to Bangor station every morning to access a wider employment market in Greater Belfast, where the jobs are.

What happens when extreme weather strikes? On the Bangor line, as the hon. Member for North Down said, trees fall and there are leaves on the line; there are always problems. The Bangor line suffers immediate cancellations, or trains terminate early or skip vital stops, such as the City hospital stop or the Grand Central stop.

When the Bangor line fails due to weather-stressed infrastructure, the knock-on effect on Strangford’s workforce is immediate and devastating. It is the low-wage shift workers, the apprentices and the people who do not have the luxury of working from home who suffer the most. They are left stranded on cold platforms, they lose vital wages and on occasion they face disciplinary action from their employers for being late. Someone cannot say every time, “The train is late again today”, and expect it to be a normal excuse. It is the real reason, but repeatedly using it as excuse does not always work out.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

It is interesting listening to the hon. Gentleman’s speech and realising the commonalities that we have, even though our constituencies are so far apart, with mine being located on the south coast of England.

A lot of my constituents travel outside the city of Chichester for work; similarly, a lot of people living in Bognor Regis and Portsmouth come into Chichester for work. All these people are encouraged to use public transport, but since extreme weather is rapidly becoming just weather, does he agree that it is incredibly frustrating for people who are constantly being told, “We are sorry for the disruptions, but we are experiencing extreme weather”? On 40 days this year temperatures have reached over 30 degrees. Similarly, leaves on the line can stop trains from running; indeed, the other day swans on the line stopped the trains from running on our arterial railway route. We need to get a grip and ensure that trains can run, so that people can continue to work.

Council Housing

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Tuesday 27th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on securing this important debate.

In Poole, we have one of the widest gaps between average wages and private rents in the country, and we suffer from a distinct lack of truly affordable housing for local people, with house prices that are 16% higher than the national figure sitting alongside rents far higher than rents in other parts of the south-west. In 2024-25, my local council built just 89 affordable homes, out of a total of 988 new properties. What we do have is a proliferation of luxury seafront apartments that local people cannot afford. It is no wonder that housing is the biggest issue raised by my constituents. Just 1% of properties in Poole are affordable to rent at the local rate of housing benefit. The freeze on local housing allowance is making rents unaffordable; it needs to be uprated urgently. Also, we need a system of rent controls, as a step towards easing the housing crisis while the building gets started .

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman is giving an impassioned speech about Poole that is really resonating with me as the MP for Chichester, because I see in my constituency large-scale developments delivering four and five-bedroom luxury houses that are not affordable for most people. Does he agree that middle-income earners are particularly affected? A lot of our frontline service workers cannot afford private rents, but earn too much to be eligible for social housing. That is why we need to see a number of social homes across the whole country that the Government will deliver, so that developers cannot renege on their commitments to deliver the homes that we are asking for.

[Neil Duncan-Jordan]

Yes. Obviously, there is an issue about viability and the way developers use that to renege on their earlier commitments to local authorities. There is also the key point that if we want the public sector and public services of the future, the workers who provide those services need to be able to afford to live in the area, so it is a circular argument that we need to keep making with the Government.

Building a new generation of council houses is essential to ending the housing crisis. The £39 billion social and affordable homes programme is welcome, but does not go far enough. The Government need to be more creative when it comes to longer term financing of the sector. Currently, £88 billion-worth of UK pension funds is invested in fossil fuel companies. What better use of that money could there be than redirecting it into council housing?

Let us be more ambitious in our growth agenda. Let us see a council house building programme as a key part of that ambition. Let us remove the historical debt from councils’ housing revenue accounts, which other Members have mentioned. Let us unlock low-cost financing for council house building, enable councils to buy land at the right price to build social rent homes, and bring empty properties back to life. Let us give future generations the hope that was there after 1945, with a real housing revolution that offers everyone a place they can call home.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

Thank you, Sir Jeremy. I warmly congratulate the hon. Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) not only on securing the debate but on the powerful and thoughtful way in which he commenced it, as usual. I also congratulate the other 15 hon. Members who contributed. I cannot disagree with any of the points made powerfully by them, and I hope that the Minister is listening.

I declare an interest as a member of the Cornwall Rural Housing Association and as a past chief executive, now volunteer board member, of the Cornwall Community Land Trust, which is a registered provider of affordable homes across Cornwall and on the Isles of Scilly. I noticed that we were not only debating the issue of council housing but straying into questions about the integrity of the planning and development system. That system is of course critical to delivering the big house building programme that the Government have promised. It is clear that in many parts of the country house building, particularly of social and affordable homes, has stalled.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

An issue we have seen in my constituency is developers citing viability assessments to try to renege on the commitments that they originally outlined to deliver social and affordable homes. They would rather pay something called a commuted sum—in effect a fine—that does not actually help to deliver social homes at scale. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Minister should look at the way the commuted sum is assessed so that we do not lose the opportunity for social homes to be delivered?

Rough Sleeping and Good Growth Funds

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Monday 26th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for that important question. I highlighted the fact that, for many people leaving prison, a secure and safe accommodation may not be waiting at the end, so we are looking at working more closely with colleagues in the MOJ and across the prison estate to ensure that people leaving prison go to somewhere safe. The Secretary of State continues to press that with other Cabinet members and it is something we regularly discuss at the interministerial group, where all colleagues come together to discuss that. With regard to her question about reporting and the figures base, I will take that back to officials.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Stonepillow is a local charity tackling homelessness on the streets of Chichester. One of its most vital services is the day hubs, where people can engage if they are at risk of, or are experiencing, homelessness, importantly without any judgment. So much of the Government’s previous funding has been crisis funding, but prevention work, as the Minister knows, is a key part of tackling the root causes and cycles of homelessness. If this programme is designed to be locally led, does the Minister see value in encouraging local leaders to direct some of the funding to outreach services such as the day hubs, which are currently working on an annual cycle and do not have the structure to know that they will survive?

[Florence Eshalomi]

The hon. Member has given a crucial example of where this works well, but, as she says, some charities and other organisations have been working with very little funding. I ask her to engage with her council to ensure that the vital funds that every area will receive are going to the right organisations. I will be happy to provide her with more details in that regard.

Black History Month

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Thursday 22nd October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

The Minister will know that Munya Chawawa’s experience took place in my constituency. Chichester Festival theatre has been supporting the cast after they came forward and explained the racism that they saw. Munya also spoke about a “pipeline of hatred” that people are seeing on their screens and in their algorithms; it is shifting the Overton window and letting people think that things like that are okay when they are absolutely not. Does she agree that we need to call out the far-right rhetoric that is being pushed on to our teenagers’ social media screens, in order to protect people across the country who dedicate their life to creating wonderful art?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the hon. Member; I know that she has been in touch with many of the cast members of that play and the Chichester Festival theatre. She is right that we have to ensure that we as parliamentarians, as a society, and as community groups do not allow this to be normalised, and think it is okay in 2026, in modern Britain. We can disagree on many things, but it is the responsibility of all of us in this Chamber, the Government and society to ensure that everyone is safe and able to live freely, and I want to be clear that the Government will not sit on their hands and watch this hatred thrive. In March, my Department published a cross-Government social cohesion plan, “Protecting What Matters”, which sets out more than 90 policy recommendations and commitments to improve cohesion, including measures to further tackle hate and inequality in everyday life.

Throughout the United Kingdom’s history, we have overcome adversity by coming together and showing that we have so much more that unites us than divides us. We showed that exactly 50 years ago with the passing of the Race Relations Act 1976, a landmark piece of legislation protecting the rights of all of us to live free from discrimination, and the 1965 Act, which built the foundations of equality.

History demands that, just as we celebrated the victories of previous generations, each of us must stand up for what is right in our time. That same unity remains our greatest defence. We must stand together against forces attempting to divide us, and must ensure that we all continue to be heard. I hope that Members will agree that there is a lot more that we can do, but united we are stronger. I commend this debate to the House.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to speak in today’s debate on Black History Month and follow some incredible contributions from the Minister, the shadow Minister and the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra). I thank the Government for ensuring that the debate takes place in Government time, as that is a clear indication of just how important the subject is.

Britain’s black communities have enriched the social fabric of the United Kingdom, adding vitality to our streets, shops, frontline services and culture throughout the country. We would be a poorer, less dynamic, less exciting and less colourful country had individuals not boarded ships such as the HMT Empire Windrush and made Britain their home. As the Minister acknowledged, Black History Month has been marked for 39 years and when it was first celebrated, there were just three black MPs. Its purpose is to remember those who came before—as the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston said, we stand on the shoulders of those who came before us—but it also looks to the future to address the systemic issues that our black communities still face. In Chichester and throughout the country, we owe our black communities so much, yet, in truth, society has let them down badly and continues to do so. The lives of far too many people are still blighted by prejudice, discrimination and inequality.

I thank the Minister for raising the case that Munya Chawawa has brought into the light this week. He is an actor, comedian and social commentator, and his social commentary about his experience in the past six weeks in Chichester has broken my heart. He spoke out about the experience of the cast of “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”, who have been with us over the past six weeks doing a really cool production—it is one of the best versions that I have ever had the privilege of watching. It is also Munya’s first time taking to the stage—in a Shakespeare play—and it was incredibly inspiring to have kids from the BRIT School come and watch the performance. Munya has established the Black Boys Theatre Club, and it is his ambition to ensure that black children have access to theatre. I watched with delight all these young children talking about how much they had enjoyed watching Shakespeare in Chichester and how cool their first experience of theatre was in my constituency.

Munya spoke about a homophobic attack—it has now been called a hate crime, and an arrest has been made—that caused the show not to go up. When that happened, the rest of the cast spoke about their experiences over the past six weeks of just walking through the city. When they went for a night out in Brighton to get out of Chichester, they experienced racism there. Munya has said that he experienced more racism and xenophobia in six weeks than he had experienced in his entire life. He has been a tireless campaigner against discrimination —he is very good at calling it out and doing so in a comedic way that lots of people identify with; that is why he has such a huge following on social media—and I am really grateful to him for calling it out.

I declare an interest, as a trustee of Chichester Festival Theatre. The theatre has been trying to tackle this issue for years and years, and we have been having a conversation about it with the board. When we invite talented actors to Chichester Festival Theatre, we want them to feel like it is their home. We want them to feel welcome and included, so how do we make the environment around the theatre like that for them? I have been somewhat reassured by the outpouring of love both on social media and in my inbox from people saying, “I had no idea. What can we do?” One of the reflections that the cast shared with the theatre was that they were in the city centre when these things happened, but nobody called them out.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the hon. Member for highlighting what happened in her constituency. One of the issues that black people and black Members raise is the fact that it can be continuously tiring when it is only black people highlighting this issue. Does she agree that by raising this issue as a constituency MP, she is shining another light on it?

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

I appreciate that intervention. It is not the job of those who experience the abuse to be the only ones calling it out. Going forward, we are working as a community to bring voices together so that we can talk about and come up with actions to better support those experiencing abuse. That should not be the job of those experiencing intolerance and abuse day in, day out.

We also need to do some work with the police, whom I have spoken to at length over the last couple of weeks. When I say, “This is happening”, they say, “It was not reported”—well, it was not reported because people get really tired of constantly reporting things and not seeing a change. A lot of the cast members did not share their experience with the theatre before the homophobic attack that caused the show not to go up. It was only then, in a safe space, that they were able to say, “Actually, that resonates with me, because I experienced this when I was out in the city centre. I experienced this when we went out to get food.” They had not reported their experiences to the police, and the onus should not always be on them to do so. We need to have a wider conversation about what businesses and individuals can do in the city.

In truth, it feels like we are going backwards. Somebody said to me the other day, “It does not feel like the Overton window has shifted; it feels like it has fallen out of its frame.” Much of the abuse comes from individuals who are emboldened by the growth and increasing acceptance of the far right on social media, in the press and across other platforms. Those are spaces, often pushed by prominent politicians, that make individuals, particularly young people, believe that certain language and behaviours are acceptable.

Racist abuse and far-right views gain even greater reach when they are associated with political leaders; the algorithm eats those views up and sends them into those spaces. We all have a responsibility to challenge those prejudices and behaviours, especially when we have important political debates about issues such as immigration, in which people too often conflate immigration, race and crime. I for one do not want racism to become normalised once more, or for people to feel that staying silent is easier than standing up for others. We all need to call it out whenever we see it.

Moving forward, it is important that we in this place reflect on the scandals of the past that have left dark scars on our society. From Windrush to Grenfell and the crisis in maternity care, those scandals represent individuals and communities who have been let down, where systemic discrimination has played no small part. Those are individuals whose dignity and rights were disregarded because of failings in the state apparatus. I am proud that the Liberal Democrats are committed to fighting for racial equality, and that means unequivocally condemning racism in all its forms and tackling injustice wherever we see it.

It is a shame that my hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) cannot be here today. I see how much abuse he receives online on social media. When he puts up a post about something he is doing to fight for Eastbourne general hospital, someone will write in the comments section, “Deport.” His response to that is, “There are no direct flights to Eastbourne general hospital, so I can’t do that.” I recognise that the proliferation of abuse that is then liked and shared means that his experience as a black MP is totally different from my experience as a white MP. The abuse he receives is off the scale and totally unacceptable.

In the Liberal Democrat election manifesto, we committed to implementing a comprehensive race equality strategy aimed at reducing the disproportionately high maternal mortality rates experienced by black women and eliminating racial disparities in maternal health through a cross-departmental target and strategy. We also want to end the disproportionate use of stop and search and require all police forces throughout the country to adopt ambitious targets for improving the diversity of their workforces. We have also called for the reversal of the voter ID scheme, which disproportionately excludes minorities from democracy, and for all political parties to publish candidate diversity data. We must also tackle discrimination in the use of new technology, beginning with halting the use of facial recognition surveillance, which is much more likely to wrongly identify black people or women.

On criminal justice, it is clear that the immense disparity in different ethnicities in our prison population represents a systemic failing across society. As of this year, 12% of the prison population are black, far exceeding the percentage of the general population. That is underpinned by the fact that black defendants receive on average longer custodial sentences than people of other ethnicities for the same crimes. It is clear that much more needs to be done across the system to begin to address those disparities, particularly on diversity and training in the judiciary. The Liberal Democrats tabled amendments to the Courts and Tribunals Bill in that regard. We must implement a new data strategy across the criminal justice system to ensure that capacity meets demand and that we understand the needs of all users, especially victims, vulnerable people and those from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Black History Month is a vital opportunity to celebrate the immense contribution that black people make to our lives in Britain. There are those who ask why we need Black History Month; I hear that being said. That is the same argument used by people who say, “Why do we need Pride? Have we not got there?” No, we absolutely have not. What happened in Chichester just this week is a prime example of why it is all the more important to keep highlighting these things year on year. As the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston said, progress is not linear. It is very easy to slip backwards, and we all need to be alive and alert to that. We need to ensure that we represent all the wonderful qualities that we want our country to represent, not those that do not represent what we feel.

We must carry on celebrating Black History Month, because we have an immense contribution to celebrate, but it also provides the chance to recognise the scale of the challenge we still face. I am very grateful to the Leader of the House for granting time for this important debate.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

As Members have already mentioned the late Jason Arday, I have taken some advice from the Clerk. The Jason Arday case is sub judice, because the inquest has been opened and adjourned. Hon. Members should not refer to that specific case. If they want some more advice, we are here to provide it. I call Abena Oppong-Asare.

--- Later in debate ---

[Terry Jermy]

I recognise my hon. Friend’s own trailblazing experience as a fellow Member from the eastern region. I pay tribute to him, and I absolutely congratulate the organisation he mentioned.

It is really important that these achievements are recognised because, sadly, the story of Dr Minns was forgotten. For a while, it was thought that John Archer, the mayor of Battersea, was Britain’s first black mayor, despite being elected 10 years later. We must talk about and recognise these achievements—although I apologise to my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova)! I hope that mentioning Dr Minns’s story today will help to honour his legacy and highlight the work he did for his community. It is a reminder that democratic public participation belongs to everyone in our communities, and that the contributions of those who came before us should inspire all who follow.

It has been a difficult few months for my constituency, particularly for my home town of Thetford, with the violent protests in my community. I absolutely recognise that among those protesting were people with legitimate concerns about immigration—whether that be public safety or the impact on services—but, sadly, many were motivated by racism, and we must call out and denounce that at every opportunity. I similarly condemn those who fan the flames of extremism, particularly those who do so for political gain. Their actions led to black and minority ethnic members of my community feeling unsafe and living in fear—often the fear of being misidentified as an asylum seeker—which resulted in children of mixed heritage, like my 10-year-old niece, being asked at school if she was an asylum seeker.

We can and must do better than this. The Government, and the Home Office in particular, need to do far more in relation to community cohesion, particularly in areas such as mine that are close to a former military base that has been identified as a possible site to house asylum seekers, and for communities currently concerned about the dispersal policy.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need to stop politicians from profiting by sharing such views? The hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe) has declared earnings of over £100,000 from X since being elected to this place, so it pays to say more explicitly appalling things. Does the hon. Member agree with me that we should end that practice entirely?

[Terry Jermy]

I absolutely agree—

--- Later in debate ---

[Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) (Lab)]

It is always a pleasure to speak in the Black History Month debate. It is educational, it is inspiring, and while I know of many of the black Britons we celebrate, I always love hearing about those I have never heard about before, especially when Members tell us about black Britons from their own constituencies. That is what makes this debate matter.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

Earlier, Madam Deputy Speaker mentioned the Serjeant at Arms. I hope the hon. Lady will forgive me for intervening to pay tribute to the Serjeant at Arms, because he was educated in my constituency at Bishop Luffa school. I want to put on the record how proud Bishop Luffa school is of how far he has come.

[Bell Ribeiro-Addy]

We are all extremely proud of the Serjeant at Arms.

I start by congratulating my neighbour and hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi) on her powerful opening speech. I hope that there is some pepper soup in her future to help with her cold. I join her in paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare), who has, in our time in this place, led this debate on a number of occasions. I also pay tribute to her because earlier this week I read out a list of names and inadvertently missed her off it. She may wonder why this is the fourth time I am apologising. Perhaps it is the death stare she gave me on the day, or perhaps it is how she has looked at me from out the side of her eye ever since. It might be because I cannot allow the idea that I would shadily forget her, of all people. She is my fellow British-Ghanian MP, of whom I am extremely proud.

When we err publicly, we should atone in the same way. I put on record that my hon. Friend has been a huge support to me, particularly in the past few months, as I have dealt with a challenging time as the Member of Parliament for the Arday family. I know her well enough to know that she will look at me from out the side of her eye until at least 2027, which is not too far away, but I hope that this House now knows that she is somebody who I celebrate in my community.

As we celebrate our friends and community members, it is important that we do not lose sight of the dangerous times that we live in. Online hate is rising, and foreign billionaires such as Elon Musk pour time, money and energy into far-right movements, such as the one led by Tommy Robinson. Racism is no longer whispered; it is amplified, monetised and making its way into our politics. That is why this debate is not a nicety, but a necessity.

Despite what some in the Reform party would like to suggest, black Britons are British, our history is British history and our contributions are equal to those of other Britons and equally worthy of celebration. Before the online trolls pile in with the inevitable, “Why do we have Black History Month? What about White History Month?”, I remind them that had they paid attention in school, they would know that the history of other Britons has dominated our curriculum and that happens all throughout the year. We have a Black History Month as just one month to honour those who were clearly written out of our history books. Black History Month is intended to exist until such a time as those Britons are truly incorporated. It is a means to an end. It was never intended to be an end in itself. We say that black history is British history simply as a call to action.

Black History Month was first marked in October 1987, as we have heard repeatedly, and it was specifically done on the 150th anniversary of Caribbean emancipation. It was organised by Akyaaba Addai-Sebo, a Ghanaian-born special projects officer at the Greater London council. He has been trying tirelessly, particularly as we move to the 40-year celebration next year, to get in touch with Ministers, the Mayor of London and others to make sure that he is included in the celebrations. I hope Members have heard that and will encourage that, as he was the person who led on this.

I was pleased to hear the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), saying that black history is British history during her opening speech, because I understand from comments left on my own social media that that is not the view of everybody in the House. I posted a video of me speaking during Black History Month perhaps a couple of years ago, making that specific point that black history is British history. Her colleague commented that that was not the case. They did not make a racist comment, but they made a point about how it was divisive.

On the same post, I received a lot of racist abuse—some of a kind that I had not necessarily seen in that volume before. I had people calling me the N-word, people telling me to eff-off and go back to where I came from, and people sending monkey photographs. All those sorts of things show just how turbocharged things are. The hon. Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) said that things seem to be going backwards, and I think we need to keep an eye on it. As we look forward to the 40-year celebration of Black History Month next year, I hope a lot more effort is put into challenging racism, right from the top in this House.

We have to remember that Black History Month began as an act of resistance, a way to challenge racism and inspire young people, and a way to repair the record. Today it is a fixture in our national calendar, with thousands of events every October. That is why we find that some Members are losing their voice because of all those events every October. It became a fixture not by accident, but because campaigners, activists and educators fought for it, and they still do. They make sure that our young people learn things that we were never taught. They lift up names that would otherwise be forgotten, and they push back against those who profit from dividing our communities.

Every year, however, black Members are forced to play a guessing game. We look on the Order Paper with no idea whether this month we will be honoured with a debate in this Chamber. While I am pleased that this debate is being held in Government time, Black History Month has happened every October since 1987. That means it is almost as old as me and, as my aunt reminded me last week, I am much older than she thought I was. There is absolutely no reason why this debate should not be a permanent fixture, and I hope that the Minister will take that request to the Leader of the House.

We cannot talk about black history without talking about reparations. I say that because the existence of black history is reparatory in itself. I pay tribute to those Members in this House—the first black Members in this House—who made that point repeatedly. There was Bernie Grant MP, who was the first to ask a question in Prime Minister’s questions on it. He was the founder of the UK reparations movement. Our Mother of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), has led many meetings in Parliament on this issue, including when I worked for her. Lord Paul Boateng continues to lead the charge in the other place on the restitution of artefacts and human remains.

My old history teacher, Mr Melvin Smart, passed earlier this year. He said that we study the past to live the present with an eye on the future, and that is just it. Reparations are not meant to be about guilt, but repair; looking at what we did wrong and attempting to fix it. It is not meant just to be about money, but that is what always happens. We talk about it in financial terms, and we talk about paying. We talk about who gets paid and all the things that can easily be slammed down, instead of talking about all the things that we could move forward with.

Local Government Reorganisation

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Monday 7th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I want to impress upon the Secretary of State the anger that my local councillors, across all parties, are feeling at yet another pause, because pauses create more uncertainty for local authorities, when they should be planning for the future so that our residents get better services in the long term. Does the Secretary of State believe that a single resident in West Sussex is better off because of the reforms that were announced two years ago?

[Angela Rayner]

If we get this right, it can unlock benefits through local government reform, and whether in education, transport, local services, or social care, I absolutely believe it can unlock such reform. I am a big champion of local government. I am a creature of it; I spent a long time there, and represented members who work in local authorities, so I want to get this right. The hon. Member is correct to pull me up on this and say that people are frustrated. I understand that, but I want to ensure, in good conscience, that I have all the information available on working with local areas to get this right.

Local Government Reorganisation

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Monday 13th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Alison McGovern]

Yes, we will consider representations from all stakeholders through this process.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

Most areas that will have local elections next year know what their local authority boundaries will look like, but residents of West Sussex are still completely in the dark. Those in, specifically, Bersted and Pagham are worried about being put into a coastal authority that risks being bankrupt on day one. When the Minister comes to the House on Thursday, will she lay out how a deficit of, potentially, £45 million will be plugged, and will she also rule out using one authority to pay for the deficit of the other?

[Alison McGovern]

I take the hon. Lady’s question as a kind of pre-alert for what she would like to know on Thursday. That is helpful, and I thank her for it. Let me make the general point that local government finances are very challenging, and when a council cannot make its finances work, all of us in the country pay the price in the end.

Windrush Day

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) for bringing forward this important debate, as I know she does every year on behalf of her constituents. I also thank her for setting the scene so beautifully as we celebrate Windrush Day.

It is a pleasure to speak today to celebrate the incredible contribution of the Windrush generation to our society, while also recognising the immense failings of the state in its treatment of them. The Caribbean and broader black communities have enriched the social fabric of the United Kingdom, adding vitality to our streets, shops and culture throughout the country. That generation and their children and grandchildren have inspired us, as the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey) has said, and served our national interest through their contributions to our public institutions.

We would be a poorer, less exciting, less dynamic and less colourful country had individuals not boarded ships such as the HMT Empire Windrush destined for the United Kingdom to help us rebuild after the second world war. The hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) spoke about Winston being embarrassed or ashamed by being a victim of what was a scandal, when he should just have felt pride in his contribution to our society after serving the council for decades.

The hon. Member also asked some really important questions about the efficacy of the compensation scheme. We often hear similar issues raised, when we are talking about the infected blood compensation scheme or the LGBT veterans who were kicked out of the armed forces, about how these schemes run and the case workers on them. It is so important that we get this right, so that people are not retraumatised or expected to provide information that they quite often do not have and cannot provide.

In my constituency of Chichester there were four passengers on the Empire Windrush—that we know of—Roger, who was a student; Violet, a domestic worker; Samuel, a member of the Royal Navy; and we, too, had a Winston, an accountant. Their stories and experiences will no doubt have varied, but Chichester was undoubtedly enriched by their presence, no matter how long they stayed with us. Winston’s daughter was the late Andrea Levy, who represented so many of that generation in her writing about the lived experiences of Jamaicans who moved to the UK.

In my constituency we have seen extraordinary performances at Chichester festival theatre, often featuring and written by black actors. I refer members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests: I am a trustee of Chichester festival theatre. Our city is not very multicultural—I think we are 96.8% white—so we have been on a real journey, as a theatre, to make sure that when people come to provide incredible shows, they feel welcome while staying in our city. I know that the theatre has done a lot of work to make sure that those experiences are the best they can be.

Our local students in Chichester have benefited from the work of Hakim Adi, the first African-British historian to become a professor of history in the UK, who taught at the University of Chichester. Meanwhile, locals and tourists can learn much about the involvement in Britain of those who came here during the Roman empire when they visit our remarkable Fishbourne Roman palace.

In Chichester, and throughout the country, we owe our black communities so much, yet at times we have let them down badly. The scandal that led to people being wrongly detained and deported due to a lack of documentation was a shameful chapter in our history. They were invited here as British citizens, yet their dignity and rights were disregarded because of failings in the state apparatus.

The previous Conservative Government failed to deliver the justice that those Windrush victims deeply deserve. There was dither and delay in the implementation of the recommendations of the Windrush lessons learned review, and the independent Windrush commissioner has recently emphasised that the Windrush compensation scheme is not fit for purpose, as the hon. Member for Brent East mentioned. Claimants often find the process of applying for compensation exhausting and painful. Many receive no payment at the end of a lengthy and difficult process. Currently, six in 10 applications result in no compensation being awarded. The Liberal Democrats would urgently implement all the recommendations of the lessons learned review in full and make the compensation scheme independent of the Home Office.

Beyond the scandal, far too many people’s lives are still blighted by prejudice, discrimination and inequality. We all have a responsibility to recognise that reality, and the role that we can play in challenging those injustices. That is even more important in this Chamber because of the unequal experiences of people from ethnic minority backgrounds across our public services. Whether it is in the criminal justice system, the NHS or education, outcomes and opportunities are not equal, and it should be the ambition of us all to change that. It is particularly important in parts of the country that are not as diverse as others. As I said, my constituency of Chichester is proportionately less diverse than others. Having said that, growing numbers of individuals from different ethnicities are moving into my city. It is important that we commit to ensuring that this is not used as a political football to stoke division or hate.

I am proud that the Liberal Democrats are committed to fighting for racial equality, which means unequivocally condemning racism in all its forms and tackling injustice wherever we see it. In our election manifesto, we committed to implementing a comprehensive race equality strategy aimed at reducing the disproportionately high maternal mortality rates experienced by black women and eliminating racial disparities in maternal health through a cross-departmental target and strategy. We also want to end the disproportionate use of stop and search and require all police forces to adopt ambitious targets for improving the diversity of their workforce throughout the country. We have also called for the reversal of the Conservatives’ voter ID scheme, which disproportionately excludes minorities from democracy, and for all parties to publish candidate diversity data.

As has been outlined today in the outstanding contributions, the Windrush generation, and our Caribbean and black communities more broadly, have given so much to this country. I would particularly like to put on record a tribute to my noble Friend Baroness Floella Benjamin. Her story, her upbringing, her work and her continued advocacy on behalf of the Windrush generation—those invited here to help rebuild Britain—are truly inspiring. She continues to hold the Government to account in the other place to ensure that people just like her, who came here from the Caribbean in the 20th century, receive the justice they deserve. I believe that she first proposed the idea of a national Windrush Day, so I pay tribute to her. I put on record our thanks to the Windrush generation for their incredible contribution to our society over the past 80 years.

Local Government Reform

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Neil O’Brien]

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman, who is absolutely right. The local nature of local government is critical.

The other problem with these giant councils is how remote they will be. In Oadby and Wigston at the moment, everyone can walk to the council offices, or take a maximum five-minute drive. Harborough is a little bigger, but is still very local. If we get a giant council, my constituents will have to drive 40 minutes up the M1 motorway to see council officers. The whole thing will feel more remote and local government will be less local. The point of local government is to be truly local and to care about the things that a big, remote authority will not necessarily care about.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman is making an excellent argument for councils to be more accountable to local residents by being closer. The Government responded to Sussex’s proposals by redrawing the red lines they had originally set and putting forward a third proposal. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that just throws communities into total disarray? They thought they had responded to a consultation that was going to form the next council, but now they have been told, “Oh, actually, you can’t have either of those things. We’re going to come up with a new solution for you.”

[Neil O’Brien]

I am very sorry to hear that. It is bad when people feel that the goalposts are being moved because it erodes trust in the process even further.

Crucially, nobody asked for this. People email me every day about all kinds of things they want sorted out locally, but nobody ever emailed me to say they wanted their councils to be abolished and replaced with something bigger and more remote. No one emailed me to say they wanted to be part of the city of Leicester. It is a bad idea, being done for the wrong reasons and in an undemocratic way.

I can see why the Mayor of Leicester wants to expand. He wants a bigger city and will get all the council tax and business rate revenues from the areas moved in. He would have a place to dump all the housing need without ruffling any feathers in the city. I can see the upside for him, but I cannot see what is in it for my constituents, and nor can they. They do not want this, as is clear and indisputable. The Government cannot pretend for a second that this is in any sense what local people want. The Minister here today does not live in our area, which is not her fault, but she has asked people what they think. Now that she has heard, I hope she will start to listen to local people as she makes her decisions.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O’Brien) for securing this debate.

Obviously, the Minister is not responsible for local government reorganisation in Northern Ireland, but I want to caution against the approach that has been put forward today, because the shortfalls of what we have done in Northern Ireland will undoubtedly be replicated here on the mainland.

It is nice to see the Minister in her place. She will know some of the things I have said in the past, including in my questions to her in the Chamber. We have done a local government review and reorganisation in Northern Ireland and it did not quite work out, so perhaps a cautionary approach should be taken, learning from the promises that were made and ultimately not delivered for us in Northern Ireland.

I note the optimistic projections before us. The House was told that this grand restructuring will streamline services and save an estimated £2.9 billion over five years. That is to be welcomed, if those words turn into reality. I wish I could say it is the reality of what happened in Northern Ireland, but it is not because the promises were not realised at all. From our distinct experience in Northern Ireland, I must therefore issue a strong note of caution to the Government.

We had reform of all councils in Northern Ireland, reducing their number from 26 to 11. Massive savings were promised due to less duplication, with no need to have so many middle staff because one departmental head could look after two sections, and no need to have buildings in all the council areas. Lots of savings were promised, and unfortunately they were not realised.

I served on a council for some 26 years from 1985 right through to 2010, so there is a very special place in my heart for local government. I know at first hand the real and tangible benefit of local councils making local decisions for the people who live there. Indeed, some of the best days I had were on the council. I love bread-and-butter issues, and councillors get their hands dirty with that sort of stuff.

I know that any Member who has served at local council level will agree that the general public having access to their council must be protected at every single level. Unfortunately, I suspect that will not happen with these reforms. We know the importance of that level of representation and advocacy. I look back with fondness on my 26 years of apprenticeship. For a short period of three months, I served as a councillor, a Member of the Legislative Assembly and an MP at the same time. I gave an undertaking to resign from the other two places to take up my position here, and I did.

The systematic removal of face-to-face access for people in our towns and villages caused by aggressive centralisation can never be acceptable. We have seen this movie before. It is like a less funny “Groundhog Day”. It happened to us in Northern Ireland, and it is going to happen here again—except when we wake up this time, it will not be so much fun.

Northern Ireland is now a decade on from our own major reform of local authorities, which reduced the number of councils from 26 to 11. The promises made then mirror the promises made today. A 2024 Department for Communities report concluded that it is still too early to determine if those reforms have been cost-effective. Crucially, the report also revealed that the new, larger councils are actually spending more than their 26 predecessors combined—wow. The promises were never realised. Indeed, they went the other way. As has already been said, bigger does not automatically mean cheaper. Centralisation does not inherently guarantee efficiency.

The Minister is an honourable lady who does her best for us all in this Chamber. Looking to Northern Ireland, has she and her Department fully taken into account the findings of that DFC report and the deep financial uncertainties that it highlighted? What iron-clad guarantees can she offer to ensure that we are not promising billions in theoretical savings, when the reality might mean taking more hard-earned cash from the pockets of local taxpayers and ratepayers? That is what this means, as that is who pays for it all at the end of the day.

We must not allow structural change to become an expensive, box-ticking exercise that leaves hard-working families picking up the tab at a particularly difficult time.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point about local government finances. My constituency currently sits in two different district councils. The Government’s proposals would mean that my residents in Pagham and Bersted will end up in a coastal authority that will be bankrupt on day one; the rest of my constituents will be in an authority that should be on a sound financial footing. What will happen to my residents in Pagham and Bersted? Their council tax bills will go up overnight to manage the debt that is currently held in Adur and Worthing, when their current council is on a sound financial footing. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is an unacceptable position for my residents to be put in, when they did not ask for this?

[Jim Shannon]

That intervention sums up my comments, and it provides further evidence. When Ards borough council, on which I served for 26 years, was partnered with North Down council, we took on North Down’s debt, while we had been prudent—very Ulster Scottish—and had made sure that our moneys were well managed. That is not a bad reflection on North Down council, but it illustrates the issue. The hon. Lady has illustrated it incredibly well with her comments.

I am all for making efficiencies, but throwing areas together that have little in common, as the hon. Lady just said, and removing the face-to-face contact points, centralising to an inaccessible hub and doing all of that with no savings to show over 10 years must be a warning to all. Sometimes financial projections do not meet the reality. We must all be aware of the myriad difficulties presented. I gave the example of Ards borough council and the changes in Northern Ireland. It did not work for us. Will it work here?

Women’s Safety in Rural Areas

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Anna Sabine]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Member. I will talk about lighting in due course.

In her book “Invisible Women”, Caroline Criado-Perez documents how the built environment has historically been designed around a default that is male, and how data on street use, transport planning and public space has been gathered without disaggregating by sex. The result is infrastructure that works reasonably well for men and imposes a hidden cost of time, money, anxiety and constrained freedom on women. That cost is not inevitable. It is a design choice, and it can be designed out.

Women are four times more likely to experience sexual assault than men, and more than twice as likely to experience stalking. Many such offences happen not in the home but in public spaces—on paths, at bus stops, in car parks and on the routes between places. They happen disproportionately in spaces that are poorly lit, poorly overlooked and poorly served by transport.

The consequences extend far beyond the incidents themselves. Girls’ loss of freedom in public space is directly and measurably linked to poor mental health. Women who feel unsafe curtail their physical activity, social lives and working patterns. Violence against women and girls costs hundreds of lives a year, alongside widespread and serious harm that ripples outwards into health services, the economy and the fabric of communities.

To circle back to my opening point, we know what works, but the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government seems determined not to implement it. On 16 December 2025, the Government published the revised national planning policy framework, and just two days later they published their violence against women and girls strategy, rightly declaring VAWG a national emergency and committing to a whole-of-society approach to prevention. Those two documents should have been in conversation with each other, but they were not.

The revised NPPF contains no reference whatsoever to women, girls, gendered safety or violence against women in the built environment—not one. Chapter 8, on promoting healthy and safe communities, discusses safety, health and crime, but does so in entirely gender-blind terms, despite overwhelming evidence that safety is not experienced equally by all people in all spaces. A chapter about healthy and safe communities which does not acknowledge that safety is not experienced equally is not, with respect, a chapter about healthy and safe communities. It is a chapter about healthy and safe communities for some people.

In January I wrote to both the Minister for Housing and Planning and the Minister for Safeguarding to raise the issue directly. I have yet to receive a substantive response from either of them, but when The Guardian asked MHCLG for comment, the response received was frankly jaw-dropping. MHCLG said:

“The NPPF is a planning document. It sets out guidelines for housebuilding and planning in England. The VAWG strategy is about protecting women and girls from violence and misogyny.”

The Department said it was

“unclear as to why anyone would expect the two things to be combined”.

That tells us that, alarmingly, the people responsible for designing our spaces and places apparently do not understand, despite huge bodies of evidence, why planning with women in mind might be relevant or useful. That raises serious concerns not just about the policy position but about the Department’s basic understanding of the relationship between planning and women’s lives.

What makes that omission particularly hard to defend is that it was not an accident. The previous Government explicitly raised this issue in the 2022 NPPF consultation, asking whether greater emphasis should be placed on making women and girls feel safe in public places. Responses were received, but nothing changed in the December 2025 revision, under the current Government. I want to be precise about that means: MHCLG was asked whether it should do better on this issue, received evidence it should and chose not to act. That is not an oversight; it is a decision.

International best practice in gender-responsive planning is really well established: clear sight lines and natural surveillance; active street frontages that keep eyes on the street; thoughtful lighting design—not simply more but better lights, placed in the right locations; and safe, well-connected public transport routes that do not leave women stranded after dark.

Make Space for Girls, the UK campaign that has done forensic and compelling work on how public space is designed for teenagers, has shown that the spaces we build for young people—the parks, play areas and recreational spaces—are overwhelmingly designed with boys in mind. The default is a multi-use games area: a hard, caged, male-dominated space that girls report, in study after study, feeling excluded from and unsafe in. Girls do not lack interest in outdoor space; they lack outdoor spaces that were designed with them in mind. The consequence is that girls retreat indoors earlier, exercise less and lose the freedom of movement that is so fundamental to adolescent development and mental health. This is not a minor amenity issue; it is a public health issue—and it starts with planning.

The principles are well established, but without explicit inclusion in national policy, they remain optional. As a result, women’s safety in public space is a postcode lottery—and nowhere is that lottery more consequential than in rural areas where the baseline is already so much lower.

The omission also creates a tension with the Government’s international commitments. UK infrastructure policy is explicitly aligned with the UN’s sustainable development goals, including SDG 5.2, on eliminating violence against women and girls, and SDG 11.7, on safe and inclusive public spaces explicitly for women and girls. The NPPF discusses the safety and design quality of green space at length, but does not mention either of those commitments.

A further tension is emerging that I do not think has received sufficient attention—the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) alluded to it. Nature recovery and biodiversity policies are rightly being pursued with increasing ambition, with green corridors, rewilded verges and, in some cases, reduced lighting to support wildlife. Those are good objectives, but in some instances they are pursued without adequate consideration of what they mean for women’s safety. A dark, overgrown footpath may be an excellent habitat, but it may also be a route that women no longer feel able to use. We should not have to choose between environmental policy and women’s safety. Without gender-responsive planning guidance, that tension will not be managed; it will simply produce worse outcomes by default. The NPPF is not a neutral document; it is a statement of priorities, and right now it does not include women’s safety among them.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is making a passionate speech about how we build in this country and the considerations we need to make. In my constituency, we have a large-scale development called Minerva Heights that was planned to be built in phases. Lighting down St Paul’s Road, which connects phase 1 to other centralised communities, was meant to be delivered before phase 2 was built out, but phase 2 is not yet coming because phase 1 homes cannot be sold. I have been contacted by many constituents who feel trapped in their community and unable to engage in other areas because they have no way of moving around the building that has already been done. Does my hon. Friend agree that this is why we need an infrastructure-first approach that comes with lighting delivered before the homes are built?

[Anna Sabine]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. We need an infrastructure-first approach that also has women and girls’ safety in mind.

I hope with all sincerity that the MHCLG’s official view is not the one that was set out by whoever gave that comment to The Guardian. I hope the Labour Government aspire not just to match but to exceed the standards of the previous Government when it comes to the safety and wellbeing of women. I also hope the Minister will commit today to taking steps towards putting VAWG at the heart of the NPPF. That would have a genuinely transformative effect on women’s lives in the UK.

Along with a series of experts in urban design and planning, I am calling on the Government to commission an independent review—a serious, systematic review of violence against women and girls and the built environment. It must be a review with teeth that establishes an authoritative evidence base, that examines the structural gaps between the VAWG strategy and planning policy, and that produces recommendations that require developers and planners to treat women’s safety as a fundamental component of design, not an optional extra. I am sure the Minister will be pleased that all this is included in a second letter that I will send to him today.

Alongside that, I urge the Government to take the following specific steps without delay: to amend the NPPF to explicitly require the consideration of women and girls’ safety, particularly in chapters 8 and 12, so that local authorities have a clear national mandate to act; to update the national design guide and national model design code to include substantive guidance on designing for women’s safety, drawing on the international best practice that already exists and is well evidenced; to require major developments to demonstrate how they contribute to SDGs 5.2 and 11.7—commitments the Government have already made on the world stage; and to introduce gender impact assessments for large-scale developments as a standard part of the planning process.

I also urge the Government to look seriously at gender budgeting as a tool for local authorities when they design streets, parks and public spaces. Gender budgeting does not mean ringfencing money for women; it means asking at the point of allocation, “Who benefits from this spending? Is the distribution equitable?” Vienna, Helsinki and Seoul have all used gender budgeting in the design of public space to reveal and correct the systemic underfunding of spaces that women and girls actually use. It is a practical, evidence-based mechanism, and it is entirely compatible with the fiscal constraints that local authorities are operating under. We should be using it here.

Finally, I hope the Minister will ensure that MHCLG is formally integrated into cross-Government delivery of the VAWG strategy. A whole-of-society approach that excludes the Department responsible for shaping the physical environment is not, in any meaningful sense, a whole-of-society approach—it is a strategy with a very large hole in it. The Government’s ambition to halve violence against women and girls within a decade is genuinely welcome, but ambition without structural delivery mechanisms will not achieve it. Right now, the NPPF—the primary lever for shaping how this country is built—contains nothing that would materially help to deliver it. That gap must be addressed if the strategy is to be credible.

The women who responded to my survey in Frome and East Somerset were not asking for the extraordinary. They were not asking for anything that other countries have not already delivered. They were asking to walk home safely, to go for a run, to catch a bus without calculating the risk, and to move through their own communities with the same unconsidered freedom that most men take entirely for granted. This is not a radical demand; it is a basic one, and the tools to deliver it in planning policy, design guidance and cross-Government strategy are well within our grasp. I urge the Minister to act. The evidence is there, the need is clear, and the gap in policy is glaring and, as I have shown today, entirely without justification. Let us work together to close it.

Rough Sleeping: Families with Children

Jess Brown-Fuller Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker) for securing this important debate. I will repeat and add to a couple of points that we have already heard.

It is not an unfortunate inevitability but a national disgrace that, in one of the wealthiest countries on Earth, families with children are still being pushed into homelessness and, in some cases, on to the streets. We are a country with immense resources and capacity to solve problems—one that spends tens of billions of pounds on weapons every year, and that has just opened Crossrail, the Elizabeth line, after one of Europe’s largest construction projects—yet we cannot guarantee that every child in this country has a safe and secure roof over their head when they go to sleep at night. That is a fundamentally moral contradiction, and it should weigh heavily on all of us, as parliamentarians with the collective power to change that status quo.

The statistics alone paint a bleak picture. In autumn 2025, an estimated 4,793 people were sleeping rough on a single night in England: a record high, and a 171% increase since 2010. We must remember that the figure, which is a snapshot of just one night, is widely acknowledged to have been undercounted. Even more shockingly, recent reports suggest that families with young children have been forced to sleep rough after being refused emergency local authority accommodation, in direct contravention of the law.

As we know, children in temporary accommodation are still classed as homeless, and the numbers show that over 175,000 children are currently homeless in temporary accommodation. Based on the most recent council-level data, as of June 2025 more than 600 children were living in temporary accommodation in Kirklees, where my Dewsbury and Batley constituency sits. These children are part of the around 375 family households in Kirklees in temporary accommodation as of March 2025. That temporary accommodation is costing Kirklees between £7 million and £8 million, which is money that could be better spent providing other public services.

Recent reports have shockingly suggested that families with young children are being forced to sleep rough after being refused emergency local authority accommodation, despite that being in direct contravention of the law. If families are reaching the point where they are unable to prevent their children from sleeping on the streets, in cars or anywhere else not designed for human habitation, then something in the system is clearly broken and the state is failing in its most basic obligations to its citizens.

One constituent, who has been contacting me regularly over the past several weeks, is a single mother with three children, one of whom has autism and asthma. The council has been unable to provide suitable accommodation for her and her children, and she has been sleeping in her car for the past several weeks. Her car is now uninhabitable, as it has been written off. She has been forced to accept temporary bed and breakfast accommodation. It is not suitable for her children, but she has nowhere else to go. I am sure that Kirklees is doing everything it can to help the family, but given the lack of resources and the lack of adequate family social housing, such examples are not as rare as they should be.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

The hon. Member is right to highlight the resource challenges that local authorities have. From an outward perspective, my Chichester constituency is a very affluent area, with lower levels of homelessness, but in 1989 a gentleman died on our streets, and so a charity called Stonepillow was formed. It has gone on to support thousands of people experiencing homelessness across the Chichester and Bognor area. Does the hon. Member agree that although the charitable and voluntary sector has admirably stepped in where local authorities are too poorly funded to support people, it should not have to do so?

[Iqbal Mohamed]

The hon. Member is absolutely right. We all pay tribute to all the charities across the country, including the one in her constituency, that are stepping in to help people in times of desperate need, when Government and councils have not been able to provide the necessary support. I pay tribute to all those charities, but they should not have to step in to provide the basic necessities for children and families in our country.

Part of the failure undoubtedly lies with the immense financial pressures facing local authorities. Councils across the country are struggling to meet their duties to house those at risk of homelessness, including children, because of skyrocketing costs, limited housing supply and shockingly overstretched budgets. The cost of temporary accommodation alone has placed extraordinary financial strain on local government, with councils now covering more than half of those costs themselves, according to a recent analysis by the Institute for Government.

I see the consequences of this crisis at first hand in my constituency, where housing and homelessness are among the issues most frequently raised by my constituents. My office regularly hears from families who are on the brink of losing their homes and from people facing unfair evictions, struggling with rising rents or desperately seeking emergency accommodation at a time of unimaginable crisis. Increasingly, we see that these are not isolated individuals, but families with children who are living with the constant fear of having nowhere to go. Local authorities want to help, but they are operating with limited resources in the face of overwhelming demand.

Another shocking incident, reported by local media at the start of this year, is that a single mum of three, including a 12-year-old daughter with cancer, has been housed by my local authority in a one-bedroom flat with damp and mould for the past two years, after a no-fault eviction by a private landlord who wanted to sell their property. Such stories mean that we must be honest about the scale of the challenge facing us and the requisite ambition to adequately address it.

I have a number of questions for the Minister. First, what steps are the Government taking to ensure that no local authority unlawfully refuses emergency accommodation to families with children, and how will compliance with the statutory duties be monitored? Secondly, what additional financial support will be provided to councils that are struggling with the costs of temporary accommodation? Finally, what specific measures within the Government’s homelessness strategy are targeted at preventing families with children from ever reaching the point of rough sleeping in the first place?

Ultimately, this debate is about the kind of country we want to be. A society that allows children to sleep on the streets is a society that has lost sight of its most basic humanity. Ending rough sleeping among families is not simply a policy challenge, it is a moral imperative, and one that this Parliament must treat with the urgency it deserves.